Sakho v Lovren
- Thread starter Rosco
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
I honestly think Sakho could be a top defender. Depends on how good you expect us to be, though.
I don't think you can build a defence around him, he misses too many games
SeasoninjuryfromuntilDaysGames missed
14/15 Hamstring Injury Apr 8, 2015 May 24, 2015 46 days 9
14/15 Feb 20, 2015 Mar 6, 2015 14 days 4
14/15 Thigh Muscle Strain Sep 27, 2014 Dec 15, 2014 79 days 17
13/14 Thigh Muscle Strain Dec 28, 2013 Feb 28, 2014 62 days 13
11/12 Aug 13, 2011 Oct 13, 2011 61 days 12
08/09 tear in the abductor muscle Aug 31, 2008 Oct 28, 2008 58 days 10
SeasoninjuryfromuntilDaysGames missed
14/15 Hamstring Injury Apr 8, 2015 May 24, 2015 46 days 9
14/15 Feb 20, 2015 Mar 6, 2015 14 days 4
14/15 Thigh Muscle Strain Sep 27, 2014 Dec 15, 2014 79 days 17
13/14 Thigh Muscle Strain Dec 28, 2013 Feb 28, 2014 62 days 13
11/12 Aug 13, 2011 Oct 13, 2011 61 days 12
08/09 tear in the abductor muscle Aug 31, 2008 Oct 28, 2008 58 days 10
Oh well yeah, he is injury prone. But if he sorts that out and plays consistently then I think he could be the best defender at the club.
Yea he needs to get that down to under a handful of games a season. He definitely has some great attributes.
I mentioned earlier how Gomez would make both Sakho and Lovren look better. However, there will also be times when he makes mistakes, and one of those two LCBs will have to be on their toes playing with an inexperienced youngster. I think the LB / LCB tandem will be better this season, but it won't be without its problems, and some patience will be needed to sit through it.
Look at the two clips here. One is for Gomez, the other for Lovren.
At the beginning of the Gomez clip, you can see him being spun too easily by Walters. That was quite early on in the game and had me worried a bit about Gomez. Lovren was alert to that but had to leave his man to cover for the youngster - see the 12th second of the Lovren clip. Lovren managed to get there in time and cleared the ball. -1 for Gomez, +1 for Lovren.
Gomez clip, 15th second, freeze it. I can't remember if this was from a setpiece, but you can see that Gomez was the last man coming out of defence and playing 3 Stoke players on side. The third one on the near side who eventually was to receive the pass was actually played on side by Clyne on the far side as well. Gomez read the pass well, stepped up and cut it out, and drove with the ball impressively to midfield. The initial positioning was suspect there though, irrespective of Clyne's own error. -1 for Gomez, then +1 for Gomez, and +1 for Gomez again for the strong run.
Lovren clip now, 24th second, freeze it. The action before it should have been in the Gomez clip - I think it happened when Gomez went far out to the sidelines and challenged Walters for a header, totally misjudged it and ended up out of the pitch while Walters steamed on. Or this could be another occasion when Walters turned Gomez. Probably the latter - I think the misjudged header resulted in Lovren coming out, then pulling back after realizing he wasn't going to get there in time. Regardless, Lovren ended up having to leave his man and pull out wide to cover, but he didn't get there in time on this occasion. Walters passed into space behind Lovren for the Stoke player (Lovren's man) to collect. I think this eventually led to the Johnson miss. -1 for Gomez, neutral for Lovren as I don't think he could do much more after being exposed like that by his LB. If this was not the misjudged header incident, then another -1 for Gomez for that one (not shown in either clip).
Lovren clip, 30th second, freeze it. Now this is typical Lovren. Let's go for the rash slide tackle / intercept outside the box. Miss it. Gomez has to cover for his senior partner. We got a bit of luck there as the ball got stuck between the Stoke player's legs and he had to sort his feet out. -1 for Lovren, +1 for Gomez.
That's all just in the first 45 minutes. We were better in the second, and I need to go back to get some sleep. 😉
Look at the two clips here. One is for Gomez, the other for Lovren.
At the beginning of the Gomez clip, you can see him being spun too easily by Walters. That was quite early on in the game and had me worried a bit about Gomez. Lovren was alert to that but had to leave his man to cover for the youngster - see the 12th second of the Lovren clip. Lovren managed to get there in time and cleared the ball. -1 for Gomez, +1 for Lovren.
Gomez clip, 15th second, freeze it. I can't remember if this was from a setpiece, but you can see that Gomez was the last man coming out of defence and playing 3 Stoke players on side. The third one on the near side who eventually was to receive the pass was actually played on side by Clyne on the far side as well. Gomez read the pass well, stepped up and cut it out, and drove with the ball impressively to midfield. The initial positioning was suspect there though, irrespective of Clyne's own error. -1 for Gomez, then +1 for Gomez, and +1 for Gomez again for the strong run.
Lovren clip now, 24th second, freeze it. The action before it should have been in the Gomez clip - I think it happened when Gomez went far out to the sidelines and challenged Walters for a header, totally misjudged it and ended up out of the pitch while Walters steamed on. Or this could be another occasion when Walters turned Gomez. Probably the latter - I think the misjudged header resulted in Lovren coming out, then pulling back after realizing he wasn't going to get there in time. Regardless, Lovren ended up having to leave his man and pull out wide to cover, but he didn't get there in time on this occasion. Walters passed into space behind Lovren for the Stoke player (Lovren's man) to collect. I think this eventually led to the Johnson miss. -1 for Gomez, neutral for Lovren as I don't think he could do much more after being exposed like that by his LB. If this was not the misjudged header incident, then another -1 for Gomez for that one (not shown in either clip).
Lovren clip, 30th second, freeze it. Now this is typical Lovren. Let's go for the rash slide tackle / intercept outside the box. Miss it. Gomez has to cover for his senior partner. We got a bit of luck there as the ball got stuck between the Stoke player's legs and he had to sort his feet out. -1 for Lovren, +1 for Gomez.
That's all just in the first 45 minutes. We were better in the second, and I need to go back to get some sleep. 😉
Yeah good points. I didn't even think of the Gomez link to be honest, but having a natural CB at LB will definitely help the LCB out more than when Moreno was playing there.
No, he doesn't. It's the Sakho haters who see it that way because they don't like his 'style' on the ball. Defensive errors (hugely in Sakho's favour), passing stats (esp. 'Long', which are important to get us onto the front foot), fouls conceded (esp. in dangerous areas) are three very important stats all substantially in Sakho's favour.
I don't think Sakho has been dropped for any performance related reason, either by him or Lovren, he has been benched because the birth of his child gave Rodgers the excuse he needed to insert his 'chosen one' over one bought by the committee. And that's the whole story no matter how Rodgers wants to dress it up.
Must this Sakho vs Lovren selection be construed as something of a political war between Rodgers and the committee members who allegedly out-muscled him? Maybe it's simply down to Rodgers thinking Sakho is the better defender in a back three, while Lovren is the better in a duo, after watching games with the analytics team, monitoring training sessions, taking inputs from his staff, Skrtel and Mignolet, etc. - like, doing things we hired him for?
Well, obviously, most of us have no access to any of the above, but we could take a very rough stab at the data part. Let's say we set a benchmark of conceding at most 1 goal per game as an acceptable standard for the defence. Fairly reasonable, as that would give you a record of 38 goals allowed. Not stellar, but *cringe* enough to place you narrowly in the 3rd and 5th positions in the best defensive record league table in 2013/14 and 14/15 respectively.
The numbers given below are arranged in blocks of games (e.g. Sakho started a block of 7 games, then a block of 5, then a block of 5 in 2013/14).
Key:
bold and red = records worse than the 1.0 gpg (goals allowed per game) mark
bold and blue= records equal or better than the 1.0 gpg mark
x games @ y gpg = played x games, and we conceded y gpg
no Sakho/Lovren = no Sakho/Lovren in the starting lineup; they had a few minor sub appearances in there
2013/14 - Sakho : >> 7 games @ 1.43 gpg >> 5 @ 1.2 >> 5 @ 2.0
2013/14 - no Sakho : >> 3 games @ 0.0 gpg >> 4 @ 1.75 >> 9 @ 1.33 >> 4 @ 1.0 >> 1 @ 1.0
2014/15 - Sakho : >> 3 games @ 1.33 gpg >> 9 @ 0.78 >> 3 @ 2.0 >> 1 @ 6.0
2014/15 - no Sakho : >> 2 games @ 2.0 gpg >> 11 @ 1.27 >> 3 @ 0.33 >> 6 @ 1.0
2014/15 - Lovren : >> 12 games @ 1.8 gpg >> 1 @ 3.0 >> 3 @ 0.33 >> 6 @ 1.0
2014/15 - no Lovren: >> 3 games @ 0.33 gpg >> 9 @ 0.78 >> 3 @ 2.0 >> 1 @ 6.0
Summary:
2013/14 - Sakho : 0 / 17 games equal or better than mark
2013/14 - no Sakho : 8 / 21 games equal or better than mark
2014/15 - Sakho : 9 / 16 games equal or better than mark
2014/15 - no Sakho : 9 / 22 games equal or better than mark
2014/15 - Lovren : 9 / 22 games equal or better than mark
2014/15 - Lovren : 12 / 16 games equal or better than mark
We met the mark in 9 / 33 games Sakho's started. Lovren? 9 / 22.
We met the mark in 17 / 43 games Sakho didn't start. 12 / 16 when Lovren doesn't.
The numbers don't say Sakho is better. Yes, I know, they're just numbers - but numbers are a source of input these days so we have to give them the due recognition that they'll sway decisions.
All right, so how about context then? Everyone's (rightly) talking about stats and context these days, so let's put some context into it and see what happens. Look at Sakho's only run of games in 2 seasons meeting the 1.0 mark. Right, that block of 9 games @ 0.78 gpg in 2014/15. Know what that coincides with? Our three-at-the-back system. Take his numbers from outside that system, and we never met the 1.0 mark.
How about for Lovren? He put in a small, good block in the three-back system (3 @ 0.33) but was atrocious in a two-back system in the run of 12 games to start the season - 12 @ 1.8! OMG... the worse Sakho ever did in a CB pair and in a block of more than 5 games was 1.43... Saving grace for Lovren - that block of 1.0 gpg in the 6 games before Stoke. His stats are blessed by him missing that game, the lucky bitch. Anyway, from transfermarkt - we played two at the back in 5 of those 6 games and conceded 2 goals. The game against Palace - we went to three at the back and shipped 3 goals at home.
So what does this all mean? It means that one factor of one factor in the decision-making process - if you believe there's a scientific one besides a bunch of pricks in petty squabbles with one another - i.e. one particular cut of the numbers, does not bear out the "fact" that Sakho is better than Lovren (nor does it argue otherwise). It suggests though, that to make good use of Sakho, we should play a back three, and Lovren was a cunt in the first half of the season, but maybe half a cunt in the second half.
Fuck, I think I need to get some more sleep. 😀
Well, obviously, most of us have no access to any of the above, but we could take a very rough stab at the data part. Let's say we set a benchmark of conceding at most 1 goal per game as an acceptable standard for the defence. Fairly reasonable, as that would give you a record of 38 goals allowed. Not stellar, but *cringe* enough to place you narrowly in the 3rd and 5th positions in the best defensive record league table in 2013/14 and 14/15 respectively.
The numbers given below are arranged in blocks of games (e.g. Sakho started a block of 7 games, then a block of 5, then a block of 5 in 2013/14).
Key:
bold and red = records worse than the 1.0 gpg (goals allowed per game) mark
bold and blue= records equal or better than the 1.0 gpg mark
x games @ y gpg = played x games, and we conceded y gpg
no Sakho/Lovren = no Sakho/Lovren in the starting lineup; they had a few minor sub appearances in there
2013/14 - Sakho : >> 7 games @ 1.43 gpg >> 5 @ 1.2 >> 5 @ 2.0
2013/14 - no Sakho : >> 3 games @ 0.0 gpg >> 4 @ 1.75 >> 9 @ 1.33 >> 4 @ 1.0 >> 1 @ 1.0
2014/15 - Sakho : >> 3 games @ 1.33 gpg >> 9 @ 0.78 >> 3 @ 2.0 >> 1 @ 6.0
2014/15 - no Sakho : >> 2 games @ 2.0 gpg >> 11 @ 1.27 >> 3 @ 0.33 >> 6 @ 1.0
2014/15 - Lovren : >> 12 games @ 1.8 gpg >> 1 @ 3.0 >> 3 @ 0.33 >> 6 @ 1.0
2014/15 - no Lovren: >> 3 games @ 0.33 gpg >> 9 @ 0.78 >> 3 @ 2.0 >> 1 @ 6.0
Summary:
2013/14 - Sakho : 0 / 17 games equal or better than mark
2013/14 - no Sakho : 8 / 21 games equal or better than mark
2014/15 - Sakho : 9 / 16 games equal or better than mark
2014/15 - no Sakho : 9 / 22 games equal or better than mark
2014/15 - Lovren : 9 / 22 games equal or better than mark
2014/15 - Lovren : 12 / 16 games equal or better than mark
We met the mark in 9 / 33 games Sakho's started. Lovren? 9 / 22.
We met the mark in 17 / 43 games Sakho didn't start. 12 / 16 when Lovren doesn't.
The numbers don't say Sakho is better. Yes, I know, they're just numbers - but numbers are a source of input these days so we have to give them the due recognition that they'll sway decisions.
All right, so how about context then? Everyone's (rightly) talking about stats and context these days, so let's put some context into it and see what happens. Look at Sakho's only run of games in 2 seasons meeting the 1.0 mark. Right, that block of 9 games @ 0.78 gpg in 2014/15. Know what that coincides with? Our three-at-the-back system. Take his numbers from outside that system, and we never met the 1.0 mark.
How about for Lovren? He put in a small, good block in the three-back system (3 @ 0.33) but was atrocious in a two-back system in the run of 12 games to start the season - 12 @ 1.8! OMG... the worse Sakho ever did in a CB pair and in a block of more than 5 games was 1.43... Saving grace for Lovren - that block of 1.0 gpg in the 6 games before Stoke. His stats are blessed by him missing that game, the lucky bitch. Anyway, from transfermarkt - we played two at the back in 5 of those 6 games and conceded 2 goals. The game against Palace - we went to three at the back and shipped 3 goals at home.
So what does this all mean? It means that one factor of one factor in the decision-making process - if you believe there's a scientific one besides a bunch of pricks in petty squabbles with one another - i.e. one particular cut of the numbers, does not bear out the "fact" that Sakho is better than Lovren (nor does it argue otherwise). It suggests though, that to make good use of Sakho, we should play a back three, and Lovren was a cunt in the first half of the season, but maybe half a cunt in the second half.
Fuck, I think I need to get some more sleep. 😀
Outstanding post by @studsup. And @Frogfish I don't think there's much in it between Sakho and Lovren but what I saw on Sunday was a display from Lovren that was most un-Sakho like. I don't think Sakho can consistently deliver that and as I've said, I'm by no means certain Lovren can do so either but that's what I saw. That really doesn't make me or the majority of other people who don't rate Sakho as highly as you do 'Sakho haters'. Some players, notably Sakho, Lucas, Allen and Lallana really do alienate opinion but it's possible to not rate them and not hate them.
Hahaha. That's what you get turning up to an airport lounge 3 hours early for the free booze.
I love the analysis, but I'm going to have to throw a wrench into this whole thing. You can't take these numbers into any certain consideration until you include opponents in them. So you should look at the variance from what we concede to what the opponent normally scores. But, you did allude to this analysis not concluding much in the end, so you are aware of the context.
The truth is this is still a very small sample sizes and the results are even less accurate when taking into account shuffling back 4s, rotation in the squad, such as who the DM was, state of fitness, and how good of a threat we posed. Including what style we were playing. I'm pretty sure football will never be a sport where statistics tell you more than your eye and watching massive amounts of tape tells you.
I don't think a bias is behind Rodgers' decision here. Its hard to pick who is better to play here. Exacerbated by the fact that Sakho is too injury prone to be part of a steady back four. I think he is the better player, but its probably more prudent to give the back four a chance to settle with Lovren in it. Sakho's performances in the French national team are better than anything either have shown for us. Which is why a statement that has now been written three times in this thread is so ludicrously wrong.
Seriously though, great post from a top poster.
And to think people thought he was an upgrade on Agger!I don't think you can build a defence around him, he misses too many games
SeasoninjuryfromuntilDaysGames missed
14/15 Hamstring Injury Apr 8, 2015 May 24, 2015 46 days 9
14/15 Feb 20, 2015 Mar 6, 2015 14 days 4
14/15 Thigh Muscle Strain Sep 27, 2014 Dec 15, 2014 79 days 17
13/14 Thigh Muscle Strain Dec 28, 2013 Feb 28, 2014 62 days 13
11/12 Aug 13, 2011 Oct 13, 2011 61 days 12
08/09 tear in the abductor muscle Aug 31, 2008 Oct 28, 2008 58 days 10
Agger played a lot with hapless Lucas and an absentee Gerrard for defensive shield in front of him, yet his defensive record was far better.
Some people on this forum never appreciated his defensive ability....
Agger and skittles for large parts were very good as a partnership...so much so that City wanted to sign skittles and Barca were interested in Agger....and the majority of this forum did not want to sell even if the rumours were true....lets not go rewritng history just to make a silly point.
Some people on this forum never appreciated his defensive ability....
Agger and skittles for large parts were very good as a partnership...so much so that City wanted to sign skittles and Barca were interested in Agger....and the majority of this forum did not want to sell even if the rumours were true....lets not go rewritng history just to make a silly point.
Agger was mostly very good for us when he played.
Only at the time, rating him for some reason meant that we were only ever rating him because he looked cultured or something.
Nah, KHL was right. The guy was a good defender, and certainly more intelligent on the field of play than any of the ones we currently have.
Only at the time, rating him for some reason meant that we were only ever rating him because he looked cultured or something.
Nah, KHL was right. The guy was a good defender, and certainly more intelligent on the field of play than any of the ones we currently have.
I don't really disagree with that, I just like taking the piss for old times sake. I miss KHL. Sakho and Lovren are fucking rubbish, but I'm sure they're both just a couple of games away from me swaying the other way again.
The post above you did state technical ability, plenty of people rated his skills so highly I'm almost certain there were suggestions of playing him in midfield
- Status
